Originally Posted by eaglefly

I didn't say the majority of pilots have no price for scope. Some do, but for others there IS a price. I think the majority who do have a price for scope though, think this offer falls short. The APA counter just MAY not demand complete ignorance of any scope alterations, BTW. My point is that scope (like it or not) IS considered a bargaining chip. That doesn't mean it's automatically used, but doesn't mean it won't. As I said before, I'm not that concerned about scope and any misguided need Parker has for loading up NOW on 70-seat jets. If they're ostensibly going to be placed at regionals, I'll have a lot of laughs watching Parker make that work. I don't see scope relaxation as any win for him as the present number of airframes is destined to shrink considerably and adding seats to those fewer airframes will be a Pyrrhic victory in the long run for him in both the emptyness of the payoff and the bridges he burned to get that empty payoff.



The old "commuter" wasn't a bad gig, but it ran its course. Too many wanted to turn it into an upgrade mill at all costs and that we agree. Management loved it (and obviously Parker still does, although DAL and UAL see the future), but now the inevitable by-product of that philosophy had come home to roost and few want to make huge time and financial investment for a crap existence and murky promises.

Just about the time this proposal's duration arrives, this same philosophy will come home to roost at the legacies and then Parker (or the poor sap who inherits that disaster) will be screwed. That day WILL come and if I'm even still in this so-called profession, I'm confident I'll watch his pleas will be met with shrugged shoulders and best wishes.

Originally Posted by Route66

So,it sounds as if we have roughly the same perspective on scope yet you say "How unfortunate for East pilots". Why? Because that I agree with you that the APA CAN use scope as a bargaining chip as well? Again, I agree. Every provision of a contract has some value, it's just a matter of getting both sides to agree as to what that value is. How much? Who really knows.

If the APA were smart, which I don't believe they are, they will provide a cost comparison with what the company offered and what they roughly think they'll get with arbitration and let YOU DECIDE for yourself.

Now, is THAT unreasonable?

Originally Posted by eaglefly

The scope committee has and has made realistic scope comparisons with Delta and United to determine exactly what industry average scope is and where the initial proposal put us.

Originally Posted by shiznit

I don't think it's about the $$$ value.
There is no price you can put on job security.

SCOPE! SCOPE! SCOPE!

Originally Posted by Route66

So,it sounds as if we have roughly the same perspective on scope yet you say "How unfortunate for East pilots". Why? Because that I agree with you that the APA CAN use scope as a bargaining chip as well? Again, I agree. Every provision of a contract has some value, it's just a matter of getting both sides to agree as to what that value is. How much? Who really knows.

Originally Posted by Route66

If the APA were smart, which I don't believe they are, they will provide a cost comparison with what the company offered and what they roughly think they'll get with arbitration and let YOU DECIDE for yourself.

Now, is THAT unreasonable?

Originally Posted by Route66

Does it really matter what defines "industry average"? You say potatoe I say pot TA toe. What are you purchasing with scope, really. The purpose of scope is to have more mainly jobs at higher pay rates then at commuter wages. Right?

But scope has to encompass the commuters at ALL carriers, not just ours. What I think the APA needs to factor is NOT scope feeding OUR airline, it should be scope feeding ALL airlines. That is the reality. Remember those carriers feeding the competition are competing for revenue (ergo jobs) with us and our carriers.

So, where's the humanity on THAT? Nowhere to be found here!

Originally Posted by Route66

How about DOPE, DOPE, DOPE! There is ALWAYS a price for a contract item.

Originally Posted by eaglefly

We do not have the same perspective. You don't care about it anymore and I certainly still do.



In other words neuter themselves and us making the only issue what's already been offered and arbitration ?

Now THAT sounds like one of Jerry's kids talking. In other words, negotiate directly with the pilots by proxy. Sorry, but that's just playing into managements hands and succumbing to their game. My, my......you're absolutely all over the place in your representations, aren't you ?

One post sounding like a raving lunatic, another attempting to sound like a rational sympathetic fellow pilot and here like a management lackey. Even a chameleon would be impressed.

Originally Posted by eaglefly

Wellllll, pot IS legal in Colorado and Washington. Perhaps Parker could purchase, say...........a half ton of Thai stick as a stipend for each pilots retirement for them to sell at market rates ?

Kinda like the equity claim ?

Originally Posted by eaglefly

Clearly, you're willing to put forth any argument and hypothesis no matter how misguided to support your positions and lend credibility to your arguments. I think you're really making no headway here, so perhaps you'd be more effective communicating directly with APA ?

After all, they are you're reps, are they not ?